The people at the Washington Post have an agenda and will exploit any amount of suffering and shame to fulfill it. This story is certainly worth printing and reading as a horrifying morality tale about where rage, abusive behavior, and drunkenness can lead. But no, the headline dictates the interpretation: “After Dad Shot Mom: a family deals with the haunting legacy of gun violence.” The editorial team couldn’t pass up a chance to frame the private firearm.
There is no justification in this headline. The gun barely enters into it. This amounts to a frame-up job. The husband could have and would have easily used a knife. If anything, there is a lack of gun violence in the story. If someone had access to another firearm, perhaps he or she could have killed the father before he gunned their mother.
How is the mainstream media framing privately owned and privately possessed weapons?
- First, they are insisting that stories about rage, child abuse, substance abuse, and reporting failures are mainly stories about private gun possession.
- Second, they are ignoring the way crime rates have altered after gun bans—such as Britain’s rise in knife homicides (leading to calls for banning them except for cooks, etc).
- Third, they underemphasize the common occurrences of police brutality and police-induced homicides. Consider the way this mainstream story treats the Milwaukee Police Chief as an expert on the need for gun bans, when in fact he is a state-licensed leader for an army of predators. No wonder he wants the non-cops disarmed. We all saw how nonchalantly the mainstream media was when it reported on L.A. cops unloading bullets on passengers and drivers on the excuse of mistaken identity.
- Fourth, they rarely or never allow the story of a person with a privately-owned firearm stopping a crime.
The constant screeching campaign is to hypnotize the populace into believing that their families are terribly dangerous—so that the only solution is to disarm them and get them “help” from a bunch of “family services” professionals. The fact that these stories are so shocking precisely because they are so rare, is simply ignored. The fact that abuse and exploitation happen with shocking frequency in state agencies and among law enforcement groups is also ignored. The drumbeat is maintained to get us to commit ourselves into the hands of a loving bureaucracy to escape the evil clutches of the insane nuclear family.
The Washington Post story even points out why it is silly to interpret it as a story about “gun violence.”
“Police and paramedics arrive. Ken is taken to jail; Fran, to the hospital. Ken’s parents take the girls. The boys go to other relatives’ houses. Later that night, the girls are in bed at the grandparents’ house. The door opens, a shaft of light. The silhouette of their father. Released on bond, he comes in and lies down between his girls, who are too petrified to move.”
So the only people who should be permitted to own guns are the geniuses who allowed this bullying murderous drunkard to go back home and terrorize the daughters who had just witnessed him gunning for their mother? I don’t think so.
Putting “gun violence” in the headline was cheap exploitation for an unconstitutional political cause. Just like the government uses terrorist attacks to neutralize the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, so it attempts to use shooting tragedies to get us to surrender the Second Amendment. And the media is simply a propaganda arm of government.